Thursday, 31 May 2012

It has to happen, so here goes. Keep in mind that my opinions are not
direct-from-source, because there is no way that getting the D&D Next
playtest materials is worth agreeing to the terms of the NDA.

Overall, what I am hearing – even from those
saying negative things – makes me cautiously optimistic about 5e. It sounds as though the designers took my “Why
System Matters” blog posts and then, point by point, made sure that 5e would
work for sandbox gaming. Understand that
I am not saying that they did any such thing, but, if they did, kudos for them. Also, it seems as though the Delve Format is dead! That particular thorn in the arse of WotC adventure design couldn't have been removed soon enough!

5e has moved, for me, from “D&D Pass” to “D&D
Maybe”.

This “Hit Dice” thing is needlessly
confusing. In RCFG, the almost-identical
mechanic was called “Shaking it Off”, and, as that is OGC, I don’t see why
Wizards wouldn’t use it. It sounds a
hell of a lot better than calling it “Hit Dice”, which has a completely
different meaning. Shaking it Off went through numerous
incarnations while playtesting RCFG, and it worked very well there.

The idea of Themes and Backgrounds should
make a character different, but make character creation easier. Kudos on that. Likewise on adopting a simple
Advantage/Disadvantage system….although, for my money, the “Dice Chain” of
Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG is the best simple system for this that I have come
across.

I am a bit dismayed by the continuation of
disassociated mechanics, such as fighters doing damage on a miss, and the idea
that wizards can endlessly magic missile.
Magic is cheap when there is no cost, and magic should not be so cheap
in D&D. May I recommend a “lesser
missile” as a cantrip, that requires an attack roll and does less damage than a
dagger? The advantage of this lesser
missile is that you don’t need a
dagger. Moreover, each “cantrip” could
be linked to an actual spell, which must be memorized in order to continue
using the cantrip. Use up your real
magic missile, and you can no longer use your lesser missile, either. Making these sorts of choices – dealing with
real trade-offs – is a big part of the game.

(Not an original idea or observation, that, but a better plan than at-will free magic missiles.)

I have previously said that if D&D Next
fails, it won’t be the fault of the fans.
That remains true, but it is also true that if D&D Next succeeds, it
won’t be because of the fans, either. It
will only succeed if the product is good, the marketing is good, and Wizards
creates goodwill with the fans. Announcing
the release of earlier edition materials was a good start on generating
goodwill. Now, if WotC can keep the
lawyers from messing things up, there is a chance of a successful edition here.

The NDA was a bone-headed move that tells
us “We’re going to keep doing business like we did with 4e”.

I don’t think D&D Next can survive
that.

I have said previously that, for any new
edition of D&D to be relevant to me, Wizards is going to have to reinstate
the OGL. As things stand, when 6e comes
out, no one who signed that NDA can legally make a “derivative work” like OSRIC
or Pathfinder for 5e. And the people who
signed the NDA are the hard core gamers who would most likely wish to see
support continue for an edition they like.

Grab the bull by the horns, WotC, if you
want to see this edition succeed. You
need to make us believe that the needs of the game – and the gamers! – are as
important as the needs of the lawyers and the shareholders. You need to tell us why there are some weird
terms in the NDA (or better yet, get rid of the NDA altogether). Likewise, you need to be upfront about what
kind of licensing this edition is going to use.
The longer you wait, the more people you lose.

So far:

(1) The design of the new edition shows
some promise. You still have work to do
(obviously) and you need to ditch disassociated mechanics from the core
rules. Add them as modules if you must.

(2) The marketing is certainly good enough
to attract attention, and although there is a certain amount of “dancing around
the elephant in the room” in the fan outreach, it is otherwise following a good
course. This is especially true when
compared to 4e.

(3) You have a lot of work to do on
goodwill. Deal with licensing upfront,
deal with the NDA. Set some limits on
where the concerns of the lawyers take precedence over the concerns of the
fans. You need us more than we need
you. Show us you understand that, and
that you are willing to make us want you instead of need
you. Oh, and plan ahead so you
don’t have to lay anyone off for the holidays.

You need to be “WotC Next” as much as this
game needs to be “D&D Next”. The
Wizards that gave us the OGL is gone.
You cannot afford to be the Wizards that gave us the GSL, that gives
folks the old heave-ho for the holidays, or that values protecting itself from
the slightest risk over fan enjoyment of product. That Wizards has to go.

Be WotC Next. Embrace it.
IMHO, it’s your best chance for success.

Now, I’ll be perfectly honest here. You probably aren’t getting my “favourite
go-to game” spot – Goodman Games already has that sewn up with a tidy little
bow – but you could still end up with a version of D&D that I want to
play. As I had written you off some time
ago, that’s actually pretty amazing.

Tuesday, 29 May 2012

A wizard or elf may attempt to learn a spell he is aware of without spending the requisite time to study, but such an attempt is hazardous. First off, the character must make a check against DC 10 + the spell level as part of an attempt to cast the spell. The initial check consists of 1d16 + caster level + Intelligence modifier.

If this check fails, the character suffers a misfire from the attempted spell. If this check results in a natural "1" the check automatically fails, and the would-be caster suffers corruption as well. In addition, in the event of a natural "1", all subsequent attempts to learn the same spell on the fly reduce the die used for the check, as per the die chain.

However, each failed attempt also gives a +1 bonus to learning the spell if normal research is then used, to a maximum bonus of +4.

If the character succeeds, he has learned the spell! However, the hap-hazard method of learning requires a second Mercurial Magic check with a -20 penalty to the roll. The effects of both Mercurial Magic checks take place whenever the wizard or elf casts this spell.

Monday, 28 May 2012

Well, a lot has happened since the last “S
is for Sandbox” column, including the advent of the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG,
which has become my favourite published role-playing game of all time. This isn’t a major problem, but, going
forward, I am going to be using that system in my examples.

The DCC RPG assumes that characters begin
as 0-level nobodies, and the party of adventurers is whosoever survives the “0-level
funnel” that is the initial adventuring session. For this purpose, I am assuming that the
party has already gone through the funnel, and consists of either 1st
level characters or a mix of 1st and 0-level characters. The temple will therefore be designed under
the assumption that it will be introduced at such low levels, and probably
explored initially between 1st and 3rd level.

Let’s see how the new ruleset changes the
work we’ve already done. I’m not going
to go back over the wilderness area – by the time this series is done, you
should be able to do that yourself without any difficulty if you want to use
this region – except where it is important to ongoing development.

1005: Outbuildings: This is the site of the Hermitage. The outbuildings include the hermit’s
quarters, a common area for guests (including a stable as part of the common
area). The cellar beneath the hermit’s
quarters includes a secret area wherein treasure from bandits, goblins, and
pirates may be hidden.

The hermit is a 6th
level thief. This level was chosen so as
to allow interaction with starting PCs, where the hermit will not be instantly
overwhelmed, while at the same time making it possible for the PCs to defeat
him later. Besides which, living alone
in the (near) wilds as he does, the hermit will need some class level “oomph”!

Now, we can be pretty sure that the hermit
is no longer 6th level in DCC.
Instead, this is probably a 2nd or 3rd level thief,
and following the general rule of each DCC level being equivalent of 2 levels in
most similar game systems, I am of the opinion that he should be 3rd. Based on the description of the Thief in the
DCC core rules, we can also assume that he is Lawful. Appendixes S and T help us to give him a
name: Llulch the Psalmist. You will note that I chose a clerical title,
rather than one indicated for a thief, because our thief is disguised as a
hermit.

The rulebook suggests not worrying too much
about “correct” NPC stats. We don’t have
to fully develop a 3rd level Thief to create our rogue. In fact, we probably want something between
the bandit hero stats and a fully developed thief. To wit:

1204: Temple: This is the ruined temple, beneath which the
dungeon lies. We might as well start
calling this the Dungeon of the Skull, because that will be its most important
feature. Within the temple, there is an
area that allows our hermit to mimic a cleric, effectively giving him access to
a limited amount of curative magic each day.

In fact, let us
make this a temple of Hermes (as the patron of thieves, healers, and magic, it
seems appropriate).

This remains very much as it was, except
that the hermit will have more limited healing, in accordance with the general
DCC rules, and that healing will be based on both alignment and Hit Die. We should also consider a bit more about
Hermes, and the potential ways to use this temple within the DCC game:

As a patron of Thieves and Healers both, we
should declare Hermes Neutral. Magic is
also certainly not Lawful by nature.

“Quest for It”: As a God of Healing, we should seed the
temple or the dungeon with the means to gain exception healing, as an adventure
or a quest. This can be tied in with the
Skull, in that the Skull can be the means by which PCs can learn how said
quests can be performed. The Skull, of
course, is also working on her own agenda of being freed and restored.

“God of Magic”: There should be at least one, and as many as
three to five, spells that can potentially be learned through the temple and the
dungeon beneath. Moreover, Hermes would
make an excellent patron, and we should fully develop him as such.

1404: Goblin Cave: When goblins visit the hermitage, they stay
here. As a result, there is goblin
graffiti on the walls, carvings on the table, etc., that hints at what the
hermit really is. Unknown to the hermit,
the goblins have begun mining here, trying to break into the Dungeon of the
Skull.

When we were working with Labyrinth Lord, a
goblin was a goblin was a goblin. This isn't a bad thing, and works well for that system, but Dungeon Crawl Classics is a different animal. Using
the DCC RPG, we should strive to make these unique humanoids that are derived
from the basic goblin. Luckily, the DCC
core book gives us charts to help with this.

Our “goblins” will be yellow, and will
fight with two weapons. The book
suggests longsword and dagger, but we’ll leave what the weapons are open for
the moment. They are also bald and speak
a racial language other than “goblin”….a random roll as per Thief in Appendix L
suggested “Gnoll”, but for fun, let’s have them speak the dwarven language, as
though they are degenerate dwarves. Our
details will progress from this assumption.
For example, they can fight with hand axe and dagger. Their mining also makes sense in terms of
dwarvishness as well as goblinness. Although they are bald, we can allow them full beards.

"They’re done throwing that kind of effort into a brand full of toxic fans and endless bickering about products that won’t get sold."

Meh.

It wasn't the fault of fans that a toxic atmosphere was created, nor is it the fault of fans that 4e wasn't well-received. Nor will the success or failure of D&D Next be due to anything other than the success or failure of WotC to put out a good product, market that product well, and undo to whatever extent they are able the ill-will their handling of the 4e release created.

And they have definitely taken some steps in the right direction, although I think that the NDAs for the beta playtest are a really bad idea (not required by most recent rpgs, including Pathfinder and Dungeon Crawl Classics, despite Mike Mearls' claim to the contrary), and I don't think 5e will fly without the OGL.

The systems that are doing well right now have the right combination of "good system + goodwill", and I don't think Hasbro is going to allow WotC the leeway needed to recreate the goodwill that was seen with the advent of 3e.

I can't help but feel that some comments are pointed at things I've said.

"Every game company on the planet uses an NDA. There are exceptions of course, but those companies are exactly that. Exceptions. Plus the two that are often mentioned, Pathfinder and Dungeon Crawl Classics, are so derivative of the SRD that there is not really much in the way of new material to protect."

Out of curiosity, what was the last time you were required to sign a NDA for a Beta Playtest other than D&D Next? Especially one described as an "open" playtest? It is simply an untruth to state that "every game company on the planet" requires an NDA for this sort of material.

It is also untrue that Pathfinder and DCC "are so derivative of the SRD that there is not really much in the way of new material to protect." A funny comment, actually, when one considers the relationship between D&D Next and the rules solutions figured out by others.

Normally, one hopes that people WILL talk about a Beta. Talk volumes, talk specifics, talk, talk, talk, talk.

That talk certainly helped Pathfinder, it certainly helped DCC, and it could certainly help WotC.

AFAICT, the NDA in this case is about nothing other than who owns your comments and any ideas you might let drop. No more; no less.

So, here's the challenge: List who does require an NDA in the rpg industry. It is easy enough to come up with who does not. If those who do not are "exceptions", it should be easy to demonstrate this by exampling those who do.

I agree that Paizo and Goodman Games are exceptional publishers. They are publishers who have garnered enormous goodwill from their fans. They did this by following the tracks laid down in the early days of 3e....not just the ruleset tracks, but the fan appreciation tracks. WotC used to be the leader in fan appreciation; now they are not. But they would be wise to get back on that road, even if others have now gone far ahead.

As far as I can tell, given the limitations
of Google translation and the fact that I am sadly not bilingual (or
multi-lingual), Paiji is concerned that my observations go against the spirit
of the game. Specifically, he seems to
believe that the idea of seeding the adventure area to prep for 1st
level characters is antithetical to the idea of throwing four 0-lvl nobodies
per player into the funnel and seeing who comes out.

Not so!

Providing the means for religious
experience doesn’t mean that any survivor will be a cleric, nor does seeding
the area with potential spell knowledge or patrons mean that any survivor will
be a wizard. What it does mean is that,
if some survivor should end up being a cleric or a wizard, that decision will
make sense.

Likewise, the idea that the characters then
have a chance to see how their schlubs have grown, and to discover a new facet
of the original funnel – that some of their initial assumptions and
understanding were wrong – is pure Appendix N.
It is also good game structure, and need not assume anything about who
survives, or what class they will be.

What I am suggesting is meant to deepen the
funnel experience, not to subvert it.

Hopefully, completion of When Cowled Men Creep and Beachhead (two 0-level funnels utilizing the theories in the original post) will make what I mean more clear to those who read and/or play through them.

Saturday, 19 May 2012

Mike at Really Bad Eggs (http://black-vulmea.blogspot.ca/)
mistakenly decided that this blog was worth a Kreativ Blogger Award,
but his mistake is my gain, so thank you very much! I tried to find the Kreativ Blogger rules
using what turned out to be pretty poor Google-Fu in this particular case. I hope, therefore, that I am doing this
correctly.

(Really, though, thank you Mike. I enjoy your blog, too!)

Seven Questions

1. What's your favourite song?

That changes a lot. It’s been REM’s “Losing My Religion” and it’s
been Crystal Gale singing “River Road”.
I suppose, right now, I’d have to pick either “Common People” (Pulp) or “The
Log-Driver’s Waltz” (Canadian traditional, Mountain City Four rendition).

2. What's your favourite dessert?

Usually some form of cheesecake. But I am partial to vanilla ice cream with
maple syrup poured over it.

3. What do you do when you're upset?

Go quiet.
Or fix the problem that made me upset.
Depending upon the cause.

4. Which is your favourite pet?

I have no pets at the moment, and I like both dogs and cats.

5. Which do you prefer? Black or
White?

Black.
It always looks good.

6. What is your biggest fear?

Another tough question! I try to avoid being motivated by fear. When my eldest was my only, and was going to
school for the first time, I used to have nightmares about things happening to
him. When he got old enough to be near
the end of his school days, I started to have nightmares about him doing
something that would mess up his life…something he couldn’t fix. Thankfully, neither one was founded in reality.

My biological father has cerebral ataxia, which
is a genetic disorder, and I would have to say that, right now, my biggest fear
is that I may carry that disorder. Not
only fear for me, but fear for what that might mean for my children.

7. What is your attitude mostly?

Cheeky, amused, calm.

Ten facts

1.Although I live in Toronto, listed
a Canadian folksong as one of my favourite songs (at the moment), and enjoy
vanilla ice cream with maple syrup, I was not born in Canada. I am an American by birth.

2.I once had the misfortune to
fall 35 feet, breaking my right calcaneus into four pieces (severing the
Achilles tendon and requiring 4 screws to repair), my left subtalar, and
vertebrae at L1, L2, L3, and L4. It hurt
a bit.

3.I have also had the bad
misfortune of having a car door slammed on my head. Twice in a row. It hurt even more.

4.I have a terrible love of bad
jokes, puns, and all manner of things that I think are funny, but that are
pretty hit-and-miss (with an emphasis on the miss) as far as those
around me are concerned.

5.The best compliment I ever
received as a GM was from someone who had never played in a game I had
run. I was visiting the University of
Madison, and was in the elevator overhearing a guy telling someone else about
his new player and the fantastic DM he had played with previously. From the details of the games I heard, I was
able to identify the player, and when I casually asked who the DM was, and who
the player was, I was right. I said
nothing, but it felt really, really good.

6.I know far, far too much about Doctor
Who…from An Unearthly Child right through to Matt Smith’s latest
outing. I own a fez, which I was given
as a Christmas present, and a 14-foot scarf, also a present, hand-knitted. Both were given to me by my excellent
brother-in-law, James. The quest to have
a Doctor
Who rpg that actually does what I want it to do has led me from FASA
to Time
Lord to Cubicle 7 to home design…and I still don’t have one.

7.I used to own half of Golden
City Comics in Scarborough, Ontario.

8.I have been to the Disney
Compound in Florida and the Disney Compound in California. I was living in Los Angeles before I moved to
Toronto, and it seemed like something I should do before I left. Later, I drove to Florida from Toronto with
my ex-wife, son, and older daughter. Both
were a lot of fun, but I am far more a Warner Brothers guy than a Disney guy!

9.I strongly believe that it is
better to tilt at windmills than to meekly resign oneself to supporting
something one believes unethical. This has
sometimes been difficult to balance against needing a roof over my head and
food on my plate.

10.Even as a child, I loved liver
and onions, broccoli, and Brussels sprouts.
And I still do.

11.BONUS: I think far too much about rules systems,
both for games and the apparent background rules of fiction. When my daughters were watching Dora
the Explorer, I was trying to figure out the rules by which her world
worked.

Seven Awardees

In no specific order, here are some
bloggers who write things I wish I’d thought of:

Eggplant Productions (http://eggplantproductions.com/?cat=21): Because I cannot help but
plug Raechel Henderson whenever possible.
She was the first person who ever paid me money (rather than contributor
copies) for a piece of writing, and I wish all the best to her.

Tuesday, 15 May 2012

Having read the Dungeon Crawl Classics
core rulebook rather exhaustively now, I am coming to the conclusion that this
will be my go-to game for all time.
Indeed, it accomplishes nearly everything I wished to accomplish with my
own ruleset, and what it does not can be carried over from RCFG with a bit of tweaking.

Some of my posts here have already been
house rules for DCC RPG. No doubt, there
will be more. I am currently working on
two DCC RPG modules, and a persistent city setting that will form the core
location of my home milieu.

I had earlier expressed some concern about
long-term play. Specifically, I found
the idea of creating unique monsters and magic items for every adventure – as well
as the focus on questing and adventures as opposed to setting exploration – as potentially
detrimental to long-term play. I am no
longer concerned on this score.

The philosophy of DCC RPG rather forces the
Judge and players to create a mythology for their game milieu. I don’t mean mythology is a strictly “deities
& demigods” sense (although that, too, is strongly encouraged), but rather
that the creation of a milieu’s setting elements mandates or suggests the
creation of supernatural patrons, gods, spells, and magic items. In a world where each magic item is unique,
the creation of these objects further reinforces the mythology and history of
the milieu.

The process of creation, therefore, seems
to create elements that will remain in play for many years of adventuring,
effectively ensuring that you get at least 5 hours benefit from each hour of
design work. This will mean re-using
locations, maps, and (some) monsters.
When creating setting elements, the Judge should be keeping in mind that
some creatures are unique, while others are representative of a kind….and that “kind”
is very likely a “local kind”. When the
group travels, they may encounter superficially similar creatures that have
been tweaked in some way.

As a real-world example, imagine
bears. Locally, bears are black
bears. But there are also grizzlies,
polar bears, spectacled bears, sloth bears, etc., in the world. As a fantasy example, imagine giant
spiders. The spiders of JRRT’s Mirkwood
are not so potent as the unique Shelob or Ungoliant, nor are they the same as
the giant spider Conan encountered in The Tower of the Elephant. In effect, the same idea, seen through
different lenses, keeps the players guessing.
Likewise, think of all of the varieties of snakes (venomous and
otherwise) in the real world, and all of the varieties of the same in fictional
worlds. It is desirable to mimic this
sort of uniformity (in order to give the players context), but also to mimic
this sort of variety (in order to keep things fresh).

Dungeon Crawl Classics also revels in the
joy of the random table. It offers means
to randomly alter humanoids, un-dead, and many specific monsters (such as
skeletons and primordial slimes). You
can build dragons and magic swords using random tables, and then slot them into
the milieu where you see fit. This sort
of creation is fast, fun, and opens up new ideas while you’re doing it.

Early role-playing games developed their
rosters of monsters through play. These
rosters were then packaged and sold, originally as examples of monsters to be
used in a game. Often, modules would
include new monsters, new magic, and subtle variations to keep the players on
their toes. Players were encouraged to
not read the Dungeon Master’s Guide, as it would ruin some of the fun of
learning the game milieu and the rules thereof.

Dungeon Crawl Classics gets back to that,
and does so by the simplest expedient possible – the Judge himself is the DMG…and
to some extent the Monster Manual. He produces
or adapts the creatures and magic he intends to use. Each game milieu is therefore a unique
creation, which cannot be predicted by the players.

This is very much what was intended by the
founders of the hobby…and very much against certain new games that include
magic items in the player’s materials so that they can be selected from like
cabbages at the greengrocer’s.

I am going to be posting bits and pieces of
the player’s materials for the Golden City of Shanthopal (my campaign
hub for DCC RPG) here as they are ready.
Meanwhile, I am still waiting for my preorder copy of the core book to
arrive. I really want to read Doom
of the Savage Kings, the module packed along with it!

What does this mean for RCFG? I’m not 100% sure. I may come back to this, if I find that DCC
RPG doesn’t fully satisfy my personal rpg itch.
As of now, the materials remain available for others to build upon, as
the game itself is nearly completely OGC.
If you end up using parts of it, I’d love to hear about it!

BTW, I know that I should have done a review of Barrowmaze some time ago. I have purchased it, and I am very happy with it. That's hardly a full review, I know, but if you are sitting on the fence about this product, please allow me to push you over it!

Search This Blog

Follow by Email

Disclosure

This blog has now moved to the OneBookShelf affiliate system. So, if you follow a link from here to RPGNow or DriveTrhuRPG and then make a purchase within the next 15 days, 5% of the purchase price (minus gift certificates) will be credited to my account. It costs you nothing; you can consider it a tip. The link can be adjusted in your browser to remove the affiliate tag, if you so desire.